I mean ever since Jimmy Johnson was hired offense has gone the way of the dinosaur for the Miami Dolphins. Time after time, year after year, we continue to be less entertained by efforts made by "skilled professionals" in offense futility. We continue to find away to become offense inept. We draft a QB and come up with every excuse as to why he is a franchise QB. We say phrases like "give him time, the offensive line is not giving him time to throw, the scheme is prehistoric" or my favorite "he needs a Tight End". Now, many of you think I am referring to young Tanneyhill, but I am not. I am referring to young Chad Henne. Remember him? He too showed promise. He even dropped 400 yards on the Jets on Monday Night Football. The FIns even traded for a WR to give him the opportunity to succeed. But that did not even work, did it? Instead, we continue cuddle in front of our HD TV's and watch the least entertaining brand of football displayed by our team why we continue with the same ole phrases like "give it time, they need a deep threat, the defense is squating on the receivers routes, the QB has no time to throw the ball and we need a TE".

My point in writting this thread is to think for one second and answer the question "do receivers make the QB better or do we have it backwards?" Surely Calvin Johnson has aided in Staffords development. But QB's often times then most make receivers (Brady-Welker, Manning-Current Broncos WR duo). I wonder if we would would be harping on the shortcomings of our receivers if Manning was the QB? I notice we were not talking about the Fins receivers shortcomings after the Cardinals game.

Just something to think about.

Fast forward_________________"Yesterday Is History, Tomorrow Is A Mystery, And Today Is A Gift. That Is Why It Is Called The Present.""
— — Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda

I think if Hartline and Bess were on another team alongside an all pro Quarterback they would do amazingly well. Alot of it is our Oline is terrible, inconsistant playcalling and a rookie QB. Tannehill might be Henne 2.0 so who knows.

I have always been under the assumption good QB's make average WR's good but there is a cap. Luck still has Wayne, RG3 has Moss and Garcon, Wilson has Sidney Rice and Marshawn Lynch. Im sure a majority would rather have any of these QB's seeing as how the season has played out but who does Tannehill have._________________

We could go the other way also and say Rivers is no where the same QB since they stripped him of his weapons. Every QB needs to have playmakers. The whole denver comparisn is not valid to me. thomas and decker are playmakers and you would have found that out last year if they had anybody in the league other then Tebow as there QB

yea rivers is in about the same boat as tanny. [inappropriate/removed] oline with crap running game and mediocre wrs

I am not giving up on tanny until i feel he had enuff time with good wrs and oline. Its moronic to suggest we need to use more of our top picks on qbs when we clearly have other major needs._________________

The fact though is we lack a deep threat. At the end of the game Philbin knew which is why we saw Mathews come in the game and they went deep. I do believe that the QB makes the receivers better. I also believe that we finally have a QB that we can start building around that plays to his strengths._________________

It's no mystery that Hartline, Bess, and Fasano is slow as molasses. For all their positives, not a single defense coordinator is intimidated by our skill players.

We need speed at WR, period. Not across the board, Hartline and/or Bess could be a complimentary WR. But we need someone who can stretch the field. Tannehill may or may not be a franchise QB. But even if he is, we can't succeed with our current skill players. We need playmakers.

I believe the Philbin and McCarthy know how to coach an excellent offense. I don't believe that Ireland knows how to draft one._________________Earn more sessions by sleeving.

Bess and Harline are great slot and # 2 recievers, but without a legit deep threat you make the opposing defenses job a lot easier. Just think if Miami had a great deep threat reciever that had to have double coverage.

Bess and Harline are great slot and # 2 recievers, but without a legit deep threat you make the opposing defenses job a lot easier. Just think if Miami had a great deep threat reciever that had to have double coverage.

I think Hartline is his draft position. I 5th round WR. He has overachieved for what we thought we were getting. Having said that, he is a #4 WR and Bess is a #3 slot.

I am just tired of Miami making offense so hard. They cant even run a screen pass. The blocking scheme is down right poor._________________"Yesterday Is History, Tomorrow Is A Mystery, And Today Is A Gift. That Is Why It Is Called The Present.""
— — Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda

Great question. Now I saw "great" because it's one that needs to be addressed not because it's a revolutionary concept. We're in here judging these players and coaches based on what we know. That of course comes from what we've been told, what we've read, what we've watched, etc.

I'll try and answer as concisely as I can in 2 areas: QB Performance and Overall Offensive Performance.

QB:

Henne and Tannehill were both drafted relatively highly amongst their pears because of the talent they displayed and because of the need of the team. Henne's Michigan Highlights are still worthy of a 1st round pick I think. They are exciting, explosive and appear to translate directly to the NFL. Tannehill by comparison is I think a lesser prospect in some ways and in others probably better. I believe based on his education he's probably more intelligent. I believe based on his background he's more athletically gifted.

I'll tell you what the difference is. It's not the QBs, it's who's developing them. Henne started well but become a feral child unable to learn and progress because his coaches (I believe) failed to teach him adequately. I trust offensively-minded coaches who've worked around QBs (Sherman, Philbin, etc) more and while there's a chance they will fail here with Tannehill, we have a far greater chance of developing a good QB now than with Sparano, Pasqualoni, Daboll, etc.

Now, how do I feel about Tannehill as a prospect thus far? I think he's done a very good job of displaying the type of things you're going to look for: arm strength, accuracy, touch, ball placement, pocket awareness, poise, pocket manipulation, etc.

Has he been perfect? No. He's been a rookie showing flashes which is great. He's thrown a few bad balls but they really have been few in number. He's overthrown a few deep balls but they haven't been clownishly off as Henne's were. Tannehill's been missing some of the check-downs and this is where I believe Luck is better. Luck can make accurate, well-placed throws while out of position and falling down. Tannehill can make those throws but not from those positions.

Expecting him to be making players look better in his rookie campaign is only going to show bias against him, which I don't necessarily think you are (yet) Ovaw.

To continually remind everyone that Tannehill isn't proven is fine, but eventually you'll have to concede the fact that he's a rookie, he's on a bad team, he has limited options, he has no running game and he's actually one of the few bright spots of optimism we all have on that side of the ball.

And that's where you get to Offensive Performance. Until we can bring in an up-to-date offensive plan, draft players for 3-4 years that feed that system, develop those guys and let them gel I don't see how we can sit here and complain.

Ireland & Sparano had time and actually built a half-way decent roster but simply based it on a terrible offensive system making the whole endeavor ultimately somewhat worthless. Now, we're at least able to say we've got the right system to go ahead and start building. It appears we have a serviceable QB we can develop and people who can actually develop him, too.

However, this offense does not need my sitting here explaining it's faults. Those show glaringly to everyone watching each and every week.

No the scheme is fine. It's not a new invention either. It's an nfl staple.
But it only works with linemen that can move. As bad as we where in 2007 we ran screens to perfection.

I had a conversation the other day regarding what this team would look like and where we'd be if Cam Cameron was entering his 6th season as Head Coach.

I called for his head. I'll admit it. I'm not sure how you felt at the time but more recently you've defended him and now I can see why. Even if we hired Philbin, we'd have been better off having come from 5 years with Cameron than 4 years with Sparano & Co.

I think we were heading in the right direction but the Parcells era was a huge, costly mistake.

Ronnie Brown, Ted Ginn...maybe they aren't quite Ray Rice and Torrey Smith, but the direction was obviously. The way the Ravens look today is exactly how the Chargers looked when Cameron had Rivers and Tomlinson looking so good and the deep balls were flying.

Hell, when you consider he brought in Satele and Soliai to anchor the lines, you gotta admit those two picks right there were probably his best.

I do admit that it burns badly when I think about the position we gave up. We hired the hottest offensive coordinator and he rewarded us with a rather interesting draft but there's no doubt that with 4 or 5 more he could've probably done something special and made us even better.

Here we are again following a hot offensive coordinator (Philbin).

Same spot in many ways but at least Cameron's offense was proven. I'm not sure Philbin is the genius that made it all come together in Green Bay, ya know? I think with Cam Cameron it was like getting a Sean Peyton...the single figure who absolutely understood everything offensively.

I hope Philbin can develop this team but if I could...man what might have happened had we not sold out to Parcells.

I mean I'm at a loss. Its like we've tried absolutely everything imaginable and everything comes out with the same offense. I wouldn't have been surprised if you told me Wannstupid was coaching us instead of being D Coordinator for the Bills._________________FF Member #67

I mean I'm at a loss. Its like we've tried absolutely everything imaginable and everything comes out with the same offense. I wouldn't have been surprised if you told me Wannstupid was coaching us instead of being D Coordinator for the Bills.

You guys are the more reliable posters here yet you make it sound as though we can't explain our ineptitude.

You want an idea?

Here's one:

Give me a time in the last 15 years when the Dolphins had these things:

Good Coach
Good Offensive Scheme
Good QB
Good O-line
Good Skill Position Players.

I can give you single examples of those things like Cam Cameron's offense, Brandon Marshall's short stint here or Ricky Williams' glory-days but at what point can you actually say that each one of those 5 necessary things existed at the same time?

They exist in New England, in Green Bay, in Pittsburgh, in New Orleans, in Atlanta, in Indy, in Denver, in Baltimore, in NY (Giants) and certainly have in other places like San Deigo too.

They have never come together in Miami.

People need to stop talking about single guys like Marshall and Bush. We need to start at the top with a good coach and a good scheme. We need to find a good QB and then develop the team around him with linemen and weapons.